And the winner is . . . Nominations for Walkley Award for Juvenile Social Commentary
Posted by Nicholas Gruen on Friday, September 14, 2007
Writing op eds you often wonder how the subbie will bugger up your meaning by putting a headline on your piece that effectively prejudges the way people will read what you say. Still Catherine Deveny has struck it lucky. The subbie has captured the essence of her writing and her message in a few short pithy words. The first article was headed “Insecure or conservative or stupid women are bowing to the wishes of their husbands” and now Catherine has hit back at her detractors with another telling blow. “I don’t give a stuff what you do. I’m paid to write what I think“.
This entry was posted on Friday, September 14th, 2007 at 7:10 PM and filed under Media.
Follow comments here with the RSS 2.0 feed.
Post a comment or leave a trackback.
I suspect that she gives a stuff about whether or not the Age’s readership want to read what she wrotes, however. It seems silly to act annoyed about an oped generating controversy. Surely that is what they are supposed to do?
Posted on 14-Sep-07 at 11:01 pm | PermalinkPerhaps I’m an outlier, but I can’t think of any of the other commentators in The Age that has been getting a regular spot of late who is worse than her. It seems to me she just poorly recycles last weeks (sometimes last months) often not very exciting topics.
Posted on 15-Sep-07 at 8:15 am | PermalinkFrom her wiki entry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catherine_Deveny
Posted on 15-Sep-07 at 11:45 am | Permalinkyeah mate
- and what really shits you is that Deveny’s articles – especially those last two – regularly feature in the top 10 most read fairfax articles.
And you’re reduced to flogging your pathetic opinion on free-view sites like LP, catallaxy and Troppo. Must really shit you that no one will actually pay you.
Kim S
[comment edited -JC]
Posted on 15-Sep-07 at 12:01 pm | PermalinkWow, she gets to work for Fairfax. A newspaper company with a FUTURE. *snicker*
OK, enough cheap shots. Need I remind everyone of our civil comments policy here? I’ve already had to edit one comment.
Posted on 15-Sep-07 at 2:44 pm | PermalinkI might also point out that Nick Gruen does get paid for his views – he consults through Lateral Ecnomics and I imagine some of his many op-eds for various outlets are paid.
Posted on 15-Sep-07 at 2:46 pm | PermalinkDeveny’s final par about sums up the situation in most cases though.
Posted on 15-Sep-07 at 3:39 pm | PermalinkI’m sure Nick must be suffering from depression because he’s not a journalist, kezza [snicker]
Posted on 15-Sep-07 at 4:15 pm | PermalinkThats a funny comment to come from someone that has written stuff for something like Arena Magazine, which as far as I’m aware, almost no-one reads. Perhaps more people might read it if they didn’t have to pay. In any case, if popularity was a proxy for quality, the Daily Telegraph would probably be considered a masterpiece.
Posted on 15-Sep-07 at 5:26 pm | PermalinkNo it wouldn’t.
The Daily Tel is in a bigger city than the Herald Sun, yet sells fewer copies.
Even The Age doesn’t look too shabby by comparison. It sells about two thirds as many copies as the Daily Telegraph, despite being an A-B focused broadsheet.
Posted on 15-Sep-07 at 6:20 pm | PermalinkAn article about rugby and politics in France: http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article2964469.ece
Posted on 15-Sep-07 at 11:38 pm | PermalinkOops – meant to put that on a whole another thread. D’oh. Sorry. *cough*
Posted on 15-Sep-07 at 11:50 pm | PermalinkFeel free to substitute “Daily Telegraph” (no 2.) with “The Herald-Sun” (no 1.) and I believe the statement should still hold.
Alos, given that The Age is not exactly the best paper on Earth either, you might like to consider what simply going for the largest readership in the short-term means. Be glad you can click around the world now for better sources of news.
Posted on 16-Sep-07 at 7:11 am | PermalinkKim Serca’s comment deleted on account of misrepresentation of identity – Jacques.
Posted on 16-Sep-07 at 11:49 am | Permalink“She has been described as a left-wing Andrew Bolt.”
Or even a left-wing Piers Ackerman.
Deveny fills a much needed gap in the commentary market, which is a left-wing get-stuffed, I don’t give a fat’s clacker what you think,column.
People not only read Deveny, they get worked up about what she says, they write outraged letters to the editor about her, and multiple blog bandwidth is devoted to what she she writes.
This is so different from standard left wing commentary, which is earnest and boring.
The Age must be delighted. The more she infuriates people, the more people are going to read her, just so they can get infuriated.
Posted on 16-Sep-07 at 12:38 pm | PermalinkFor the record, no. 14 wasn’t me. How the heck did that happen???
Posted on 16-Sep-07 at 12:39 pm | PermalinkJason;
She just used your name with her own email. I’ve edited it.
Posted on 16-Sep-07 at 1:17 pm | Permalink